Talk:Ridley College
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[edit] Neutrality
I am calling the neutrality of this article into question, as it is suspect at best. It reads as a lauding brochure for the school rather than an even-handed summation, likely planted by the school's extensive recruitment office. Of particular note are the Academics, and School Life.
Hahbie 03:53, 17 May 2006 (UTC) I am not making up the fact that from University-preparatory schools, over 98% of graduates matriculate to university. Neither am I making up the fact that, from some public schools, university matriculation is an exception, rather than the rule. These are both independently verifiable. The other facts explain why the matriculation rate numbers are what they are. The article would have been non-neutral if it explained the $35,000 tuition for boarding schools. As to the fundamental right parents have to see to the education of their children, and choose, among other choices, to send their kids to these Schools, read Wisconsin v. Yoder, 406 U.S. 205 (1972).
I do not mean to suggest that public schools should not exist. Nor do I mean to suggest that they do not provide university matriculation, for a capriciously-chosen few. It's just that for parents who want their child to matriculate to university, sending their child to public school is like buying some kind of raffle ticket, and betting the future on the receipt of whatever prize might be won.
Simply because you may have been fortunate enough to have capriciously received a bargain from public-school teachers and administrators in allowing you to matriculate to university from a public secondary school, it does not diminish the superiority of prep schools to the mission of preparing students to matriculate to university. Public schools serve missions other than preparing students for university matriculation. And, which students are chosen to matriculate to university ought not to be placed in the capricious power of public-school teachers and administrators. Imagine sending your child to public school where your intent is that your child matriculate to university, but the agenda of that public school's government-employee teachers and administrators is not. That happened to me and my parents, which is why, among other reasons, we sought admission for me to a University-preparatory school.
Some members of society could care less whether their children go on to higher education, but they do want their children to be basically numerate and literate. Our society obliges them, too. But even people with such limited expectations complain when, as often happens, public schools fail in that basic and unambitious mission. Differing Wisconsin v. Yoder prerogatives can and often do make divergent goals incompatible within the culture of one particular school.
It is unavoidable that the disparity in matriculation rates, assuming a similar cross-section of ability among their student bodies, means that University-preparatory schools are superior to public schools in the mission of preparing their graduates for university matriculation. Neutrality? Nonsense. My personal experience has been repeated by many people throughout North America, who are being failed by the public school system their taxes finance. One need look no further than the matriculation rates. University-preparatory schools are simply one more expression of the American Dream. You want to extol the virtues of public schools? Fine. Stand and Deliver, or put up with the status quo at public schools, or send your children to a University-preparatory school. By the way, imagine a School where every teacher is a Jaime Escalante. That's Ridley College. Hahbie 03:53, 17 May 2006 (UTC)
-
-
- So what exactly did that rant have to do with Ridley College?
-